Type A600 Number 102 censor marker

[Ross Debenham]

I recently acquired a cover from No 1 sub depot, 1 (EA) BOD dated 23 March, 1945 and postmarked
EAAPO 2. It was censored using A.600 number 9425. Upon arrival at the headquarter it received the treatment from Deputy Chief Field Censor on 25 March using Type EA F3 censor marker and returned to the postal system. At some stage the 94st envelope was struck with the A.600 number 102 censor marker. Can any member tell me if 102 was used by the Deputy Chief Field Censor. 

[Michael Dobbs]

Ross

Many thanks for the query - is it possible to attach a scan of the cover please ?

What do you mean by "the 94st envelope" ?

I have only one recording of A600 / 102 which may or may not be helpful:
[color=maroon]EAC; ltr written on 2/10/44, senders address "ss Baharistan, c/o GPO London; pmk EA APO 87 Nairobi 10.X.44 [/color]
I believe the owner of the cover is Alistair Kennedy as I have his initials with a question mark after my recording !

Similarly I only have one recording of A600 / 9425:
[color=maroon]1 Sub-Depot, 1 BOD, EAACL
EAC; EA APO ?? of (15/2/45) AML to UK [Barton List 27 (27/055) 12/2/97][/color]

Hopefully others can add further information.

Regards, Mike  ;)

[Frank Schofield]

Mike

 94th envelope, I think the number refers to the order of which the letters were  posted, many letters would arrive in batches and the writer would number the envelope so they could be read in the correct order.
Just been through a correspondence of about 60 envelopes all with letters, and it was easy to sort them into order, without taking the letters out and finding the date

Frank Schofield

[Ross Debenham]

Thank you gentlemen for replying to my enquire so quickly. Firstly, you can disregard any reference to 94st as it appears to be a break in communication between my brain and my typing fingers. I have attached a scan of the cover. It is one of a batch of 3 I picked up on Ebay. All were from the previously mentioned sub-depot and all are censored using 9425 censor stamp. All were from the same author and to the same address in England. It looks as if the censor marker may have been attached to the sub-depot. Sorry for any inconvience

[akennedy]

9425 is associated with 5 Base Ordnance Depot and 1 sub depot thereof.
I don't know whether a sub depot would have its own censor stamp or pass mail to the Depot for censorship.

102 certainly appears to be used by either thedeputy chief field censor or a base censor.

I don't think the Baharistan cover mentioned by Mike is in my collection, but it is inmy records.

Alistair